000.fbsd at quip.cz
Mon Oct 3 21:26:33 UTC 2016
Miroslav Lachman wrote on 10/03/2016 15:29:
> Grzegorz Junka wrote on 10/03/2016 15:11:
>> On 03/10/2016 12:14, Mathieu Arnold wrote:
>>> Le 01/10/2016 à 04:35, Julian Elischer a écrit :
>>>> There is a need for a "minimum" install of a lot of packages.
>>> Some dependencies are often optional, and can be unchecked by running
>>> make config.
>>>> Such a 'minimum' install should probably be the default when coming in
>>>> as a dependency, as
>>>> there is an increasing tendency to configure things with all the bells
>>>> and whistles.
>>> The bare minimum will never be the default. The default is what will
>>> fit most people, so that they can use our packages out of the box.
>> Shouldn't all packages default to noX dependencies? If I am not mistaken
>> FreeBSD is predominantly a server-side system, with X running only
>> occasionally (I am running X but I compile all packages with poudriere).
> I agree. Many ports have X and -nox11 (like ImageMagick-nox11 or
> open-vm-tools-nox11) but there are still some without nox11 variant.
> But X11 is not the only one dependency problem.
> I think that dependency changes should be better tracked and examined
> before commit changes to ports tree.
I am really tired of it. Now I realized that another port is
unconditionally pulling hand full of new X11 dependecies which where not
used before ant this was just PORTREVISION bump. Not new version with
When this will stop?
# pkg info -r -d phantomjs-2.0.0_3
Depends on :
# pkg inf -r -d phantomjs-2.0.0_5
Depends on :
libX11 needs following packages
More information about the freebsd-ports